Jump to content

Given Stack Sizes, Is This A Check/call, Check/call?


Recommended Posts

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (9 handed) Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver Cards)saw flop|saw showdownCO ($22.95)Button ($56.35)SB ($25)Hero ($61.90)UTG ($15.85)UTG+1 ($46.50)MP1 ($33)MP2 ($20.75)MP3 ($27.15)Preflop: Hero is BB with ad.gif, kc.gif. UTG posts a blind of $0.50. 4 folds, CO checks, 1 fold, Hero raises to $3.25, UTG (poster) calls $2.50, 1 fold.Flop: ($6.75) kd.gif, 4c.gif, 3c.gif(3 players)Hero checks, UTG bets $5.5, Hero raises to $14, UTG folds.Final Pot: $17.75Results in white below: Hero doesn't show. Outcome: Hero wins $17.75. I checked for a couple of reasons:1) metagame. Im really trying to improve my ability to mix it up. If Im ever going to be passive with a missed AK, i need to be passive when i hit. 2) his stack is pretty small, i wanted it all 3) I know this guy, I have about 2000 hands with him, he has WEPS/FPS.Now given this read, I think I played this incorrectly. This should be, 100%, a check/call, check /call, right? Sorry if this hand is boring/uninteresting. I know that Im definitely losing value in various instances, and i think this is one of them (even though I only lost a happy meal or two). Now, if he's deeper, Im okay with this play or just a straight lead, but given his stack, even if a scare card comes on teh turn, im committed... okay, thoughts, etc... thanks in advance, etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites
What does WEPS mean?Check/call, check/call if he is agro.Bet/call if he is passive.
Im sure you've encountered people with WEPs before... Win Every Pot syndrome.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about it some more I like leading out better.If this guy has to win every pot, then leading out will give him a chance to raise all in on the flop as a bluff. I mean, if he has nothing, he has to raise in order to win right?If you decided you wanted to check for 'metagame', playing made hands passive once in a while, then check/raising is not the best way to do it. I think bet/call > check/raise> check/call

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thinking about it some more I like leading out better.If this guy has to win every pot, then leading out will give him a chance to raise all in on the flop as a bluff. I mean, if he has nothing, he has to raise in order to win right?If you decided you wanted to check for 'metagame', playing made hands passive once in a while, then check/raising is not the best way to do it. I think bet/call > check/raise> check/call
I dont think he tries to win it if i lead. He bets every check to him, i dont think he'd put his stack in on a bluff. I could be wrong. Dont know, maybe I need to play a few k hands more than him. His stack size makes the hand harder to play imo
Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think he tries to win it if i lead. He bets every check to him, i dont think he'd put his stack in on a bluff. I could be wrong. Dont know, maybe I need to play a few k hands more than him. His stack size makes the hand harder to play imo
I like it. This one of the things I acutally notice in players too. (The constant urge to fire a missile at every checked through pot).This one is kinda suited for a check-call play.Because when Hero check-calls here, villain may just put Hero on a flushdraw.So villain may hope to rep protecting his hand on any non club flop and fire again.On 2nd thought it just kinda screams "Big hand" then, given the three-bet
Link to post
Share on other sites
I like it. This one of the things I acutally notice in players too. (The constant urge to fire a missile at every checked through pot).This one is kinda suited for a check-call play.Because when Hero check-calls here, villain may just put Hero on a flushdraw.So villain may hope to rep protecting his hand on any non club flop and fire again.On 2nd thought it just kinda screams "Big hand" then, given the three-bet
That is because every moron on earth thinks that a check always means you are stone weak. Sometimes I hate it, but sometimes when (for example) I cbet AK on a QJx board and get to check behind on the turn and hit that beautiful 10, and the guy insta-pots, it's really nice :)As for the hand, I check call and then c/r the turn. The guy has no money, so when you crai him, it looks super strong.
Link to post
Share on other sites
1) metagame. Im really trying to improve my ability to mix it up. If Im ever going to be passive with a missed AK, i need to be passive when i hit.
This shouldn't really be a consideration at all at this level imo, you're just never going to get enough(if any) +EV metagame value to make it right to play your hands sub optimaly.
i really think you should lead here and hope he raises, maybe I am wrong. Check raising after three betting looks REALLY strong though.
I think is probably a key point i agree with.Btw, i think the converter messed up somewhere, i an only see two players calling pre yet their seem to be 3 on the flop.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone keeps saying it, but...where is this 3-bet pre-flop?
They're confusing the gianormous bet size and a short stack to be a 3 bet.For the hand itself, flop is incredibly standard, and the pf raise is a little on the large side.
Link to post
Share on other sites
They're confusing the gianormous bet size and a short stack to be a 3 bet.For the hand itself, flop is incredibly standard, and the pf raise is a little on the large side.
i dont see how this is a larger than average pf raise. First, the converter messed up (again)FullTiltPoker Game #5961715015: Table Far Hills - $0.25/$0.50 - No Limit Hold'em - 0:59:03 ET - 2008/04/09Seat 1: imthreeputt ($22.95)Seat 2: dbrill ($56.35)Seat 3: mattosrod ($25)Seat 4: IBFT ($61.90)Seat 5: HUDawkins ($15.85)Seat 6: shaka1235 ($46.50)Seat 7: spades360 ($33)Seat 8: iambobby ($20.75)Seat 9: rlyons21 ($27.15)IBFT posts the small blind of $0.25HUDawkins posts the big blind of $0.50imthreeputt posts a dead small blind of $0.25imthreeputt posts $0.50The button is in seat #2*** HOLE CARDS ***Dealt to IBFT [Ad Kc]shaka1235 has 15 seconds left to actshaka1235 foldsshaka1235 is sitting outspades360 foldsiambobby foldsrlyons21 foldsimthreeputt checksdbrill foldsIBFT has 15 seconds left to actIBFT raises to $3HUDawkins calls $2.50imthreeputt folds*** FLOP *** [Kd 4c 3c]IBFT checksHUDawkins has 15 seconds left to actHUDawkins bets $5.50shaka1235 has returnedIBFT raises to $14HUDawkins has 15 seconds left to actHUDawkins foldsUncalled bet of $8.50 returned to IBFTIBFT mucksIBFT wins the pot ($16.90)*** SUMMARY ***Total pot $17.75 | Rake $0.85Board: [Kd 4c 3c]Seat 1: imthreeputt folded before the FlopSeat 2: dbrill (button) didn't bet (folded)Seat 3: mattosrod is sitting outSeat 4: IBFT (small blind) collected ($16.90), muckedSeat 5: HUDawkins (big blind) folded on the FlopSeat 6: shaka1235 didn't bet (folded)Seat 7: spades360 didn't bet (folded)Seat 8: iambobby didn't bet (folded)Seat 9: rlyons21 didn't bet (folded)I was SB, villain in this hand was BB, and there was a poster of a small and big blind, so preflop, before my raise, there was $1.50 in the pot. My raise was either just a bet-pot monkey raise, or bet-pot monkey + 1 BB, since I was OOP against a blind and a poster.and i apparently only raised to $3, not $3.25, like the converter says.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really even understand why there is so much debate regarding this hand?I like everything you did. 4x BB + 1 BB for the limper preflop, check-raise an aggrotard on the flop for his remaining $8 after he commits himself to the pot with air.It seems standard to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i really think you should lead here and hope he raises, maybe I am wrong. Check raising after three betting looks REALLY strong though.
Exactly. You're more likely to stack him here if he's caught a piece by leading and letting him push with his short stack.By check raising you've role reversed him. He now has to call off all his chips which means he's lost the advantage of pushing while factoring in fold equity which puts the decision on you whether or not you want to call off another $10+. In the future I would just lead out here. If he has a legitimate hand then it's likely that he pushes and you're in great shape.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly. You're more likely to stack him here if he's caught a piece by leading and letting him push with his short stack.By check raising you've role reversed him. He now has to call off all his chips which means he's lost the advantage of pushing while factoring in fold equity which puts the decision on you whether or not you want to call off another $10+. In the future I would just lead out here. If he has a legitimate hand then it's likely that he pushes and you're in great shape.
I think its obvious here that he doesnt have a legitimate hand (results oriented, but I can say this with 100% accuracy without knowing his cards, if you're not sure why, I've made the key point about 42 times now). I really shouldn't have posted this hand. Yes, its a lead 100% of the time if the guy has more than 28BBs, but as I said, he's not going to bluff raise me his whole stack, which is what would have been required, unless I bet, what, $1 into a $7 pot.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly. You're more likely to stack him here if he's caught a piece by leading and letting him push with his short stack.
No... he's an aggrotard, we let him take a shot at betting since we've flopped something we're willing to felt on any street
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...